- From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
- Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 11:29:59 +1000 (EST)
- To: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Joe Clark wrote: > > > In your formulation below - the first success criteria is that all non-text > > content have a text alternative. Since this says `all' it means all > > non-text content including spacers, decorations etc. other checkpoints are > > in addition to this - not instead of. Correct, and they are worded accordingly in the proposal. > > Let us all keep in mind a general exception that must be applicable to all > our guidelines: If the purpose of the page (section, site, resource, > document) is to teach the topic of accessibility itself, it may violate > the guidelines. Hence indeed not "all" content may be accessible. > > I don't think that "scoping" is a good way to handle this. I suggest a > clear and explicit exception. I disagree. Scoping covers the point perfectly well and there is no need for an explicitly stated exception here, any more than there is in respect of other reasons why content might not conform. The better approach was discussed at last week's meeting - to write a section or document for governmental or organizational policy-makers with suggestions on proper use of scoping.
Received on Tuesday, 8 June 2004 21:30:02 UTC